Why was this thread resurrected? Now that the book has been out for a year, have people adjusted to this rule? If you are doing point buy/standard array, you can still swap scores around. The big issue I have found with character creation is choosing between a less desirable feat or not being able to reach that +16 ability score.
However, everyone is under the same basic description, and/or mechanism if doing 2024 rules. Turns out once you get the hang of it, you can still basically get what you need.
P.S. how often are backgrounds ignored after the 1st couple of sessions?
Because someone had something to say, and better late than never.
Also, threads don’t die. They can be deleted. This idea of a ‘dying’ thread is a pretty illogical concept. Lastly, when is a thread supposed to be dead? After what timespan? After 1 week? 1 month? 6 months? 1 year? Who decides that?
I was still playing 5e 2014, and only recently came into contact with 2024.
Because someone had something to say, and better late than never.
Also, threads don’t die. They can be deleted. This idea of a ‘dying’ thread is a pretty illogical concept. Lastly, when is a thread supposed to be dead? After what timespan? After 1 week? 1 month? 6 months? 1 year? Who decides that?
I was still playing 5e 2014, and only recently came into contact with 2024.
Threads dying is a concept as old as internet forums themselves. If the thread has been dead for a good while, just make a new thread if you think what you have to say is important enough. The exact timespan is arbitrary, but it's a common sense judgment.
There's something to be said for resurrecting a thread that hadn't satisfactorily concluded, or new information about the topic comes out. Creating a new thread is probably the more prudent action, but there's also a swinging pendulum problem there as we can get 5 threads on a similar topic in the span of a few days sometimes.
What really boggles my mind, though, is when a thread gets resurrected to answer the OPs question years later. Like, I'm pretty sure they either got an answer in that time offline, or no longer care. And how do you even find a thread like that? If you had the same question, sure... I get it. You searched and found the thread then resurrect it because it wasn't answered. But who's out there searching years-old threads just to answer them??
Because someone had something to say, and better late than never.
Also, threads don’t die. They can be deleted. This idea of a ‘dying’ thread is a pretty illogical concept. Lastly, when is a thread supposed to be dead? After what timespan? After 1 week? 1 month? 6 months? 1 year? Who decides that?
I was still playing 5e 2014, and only recently came into contact with 2024.
Threads dying is a concept as old as internet forums themselves. If the thread has been dead for a good while, just make a new thread if you think what you have to say is important enough. The exact timespan is arbitrary, but it's a common sense judgment.
Different places have different policies for old threads. I'd say "if a thread already exists, use that one instead of creating a new one" is the more common approach.
I get it. You searched and found the thread then resurrect it because it wasn't answered. But who's out there searching years-old threads just to answer them??
Answering? I just stated my opinion, resp. what the devs could have done instead. I can see nothing wrong with that.
I just want to point out, that I find it somewhat ludicrous to give threads an imaginary expiry date. Why not delete them if they are outdated? That would be logical. Maybe they are kept, so they can be continued at ANY time, and anyone can input his thoughts.
I’ve been in several forums where “don’t dig out an old thread” collided with “why do you start a new thread, instead of using the search”. That puts people into a predicament. You might as well tell people to just “shut up” as you produce confusion and discouragement.
Threads dying is a concept as old as internet forums themselves. If the thread has been dead for a good while, just make a new thread if you think what you have to say is important enough. The exact timespan is arbitrary, but it's a common sense judgment.
This concept is as old as it is useless. It has always been useless, and had been established by self-proclaimed forum guardians, and as such should have been discarded long ago. Common sense? Nothing makes sense about that. An indicator for that is, as you mentioned yourself, the arbitrariness. Where is the expiry date? Do books, or essays expire, too? Written words expire. Do you really believe what you are saying there?
Different places have different policies for old threads. I'd say "if a thread already exists, use that one instead of creating a new one" is the more common approach.
If those are ‘policies’ why do they not show up in the official forum rules then? You people should really read ‘The Wave’ by Morton Rhue one more time, and come to your senses.
Now, this thread has almost doubled in size, but with an off-topic, which is not helping, and further distancing from the actual topic. Thus I quote myself.
They should have tied ability modifiers to the entire trinity. You should get one by race, one by class, and one by background. Any race gives you at least a choice between two, or three (i.e. Dragonborn) abilities (human, and half-human species any), class grands either the primary ability, or a choice between two (i.e. STR or DEX for fighters), and a choice between three by background. You can not choose the same ability thrice.
Addendum: Sub races also add variation. I.e. elfs can choose between DEX, or INT (high elf), WIS (wood elf), CHA (drow), etc.
And please spare me with the indication that people homebrew. I’ve been playing RPGs since 1984. They’ve always done that. I am talking about what the Devs should have done with the game.
Why was this thread resurrected? Now that the book has been out for a year, have people adjusted to this rule? If you are doing point buy/standard array, you can still swap scores around. The big issue I have found with character creation is choosing between a less desirable feat or not being able to reach that +16 ability score.
However, everyone is under the same basic description, and/or mechanism if doing 2024 rules. Turns out once you get the hang of it, you can still basically get what you need.
P.S. how often are backgrounds ignored after the 1st couple of sessions?
Because someone had something to say, and better late than never.
Also, threads don’t die. They can be deleted. This idea of a ‘dying’ thread is a pretty illogical concept. Lastly, when is a thread supposed to be dead? After what timespan? After 1 week? 1 month? 6 months? 1 year? Who decides that?
I was still playing 5e 2014, and only recently came into contact with 2024.
Threads dying is a concept as old as internet forums themselves. If the thread has been dead for a good while, just make a new thread if you think what you have to say is important enough. The exact timespan is arbitrary, but it's a common sense judgment.
There's something to be said for resurrecting a thread that hadn't satisfactorily concluded, or new information about the topic comes out. Creating a new thread is probably the more prudent action, but there's also a swinging pendulum problem there as we can get 5 threads on a similar topic in the span of a few days sometimes.
What really boggles my mind, though, is when a thread gets resurrected to answer the OPs question years later. Like, I'm pretty sure they either got an answer in that time offline, or no longer care. And how do you even find a thread like that? If you had the same question, sure... I get it. You searched and found the thread then resurrect it because it wasn't answered. But who's out there searching years-old threads just to answer them??
Different places have different policies for old threads. I'd say "if a thread already exists, use that one instead of creating a new one" is the more common approach.
Answering? I just stated my opinion, resp. what the devs could have done instead. I can see nothing wrong with that.
I just want to point out, that I find it somewhat ludicrous to give threads an imaginary expiry date. Why not delete them if they are outdated? That would be logical. Maybe they are kept, so they can be continued at ANY time, and anyone can input his thoughts.
I’ve been in several forums where “don’t dig out an old thread” collided with “why do you start a new thread, instead of using the search”. That puts people into a predicament. You might as well tell people to just “shut up” as you produce confusion and discouragement.
This concept is as old as it is useless. It has always been useless, and had been established by self-proclaimed forum guardians, and as such should have been discarded long ago. Common sense? Nothing makes sense about that. An indicator for that is, as you mentioned yourself, the arbitrariness. Where is the expiry date? Do books, or essays expire, too? Written words expire. Do you really believe what you are saying there?
If those are ‘policies’ why do they not show up in the official forum rules then? You people should really read ‘The Wave’ by Morton Rhue one more time, and come to your senses.
Now, this thread has almost doubled in size, but with an off-topic, which is not helping, and further distancing from the actual topic. Thus I quote myself.
And please spare me with the indication that people homebrew. I’ve been playing RPGs since 1984. They’ve always done that. I am talking about what the Devs should have done with the game.